WG: [Xorp-hackers] Bugzilla #161

['Kristian Larsson']

On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:05:35PM +0200, Patrick Preuss wrote:
> Hello Kristian,
> 
> > Sorry for dual posts here but I couldn't confirm
> > this before as I did not have access to a xorp box
> > When doing show route table ipv4 unicast final I
> > see:
> > Xorp> show route table ipv4 unicast final 
> > Network 10.0.0.0/24
> >   Nexthop := 192.168.77.1
> >   Metric := 0    Protocol := static Interface := eth0 Vif := eth0
> > Network 192.168.77.0/24
> >   Nexthop := 192.168.77.90
> >   Metric := 0    Protocol := connected Interface := eth0 Vif := eth0
> > 
> > Isn't that information enough?
> 
> Have used <TAB> or <?> for completing the line, I know there is a problem
> with both in the current cvs, I've found the point for <?> completion so far
> It is in the cli_command.cc there are two entrys with <Enter> for the <?> I
> have found the formatting line, for the <Tab> not jet.

<?> gives me an extra blank line
 Xorp> show route table ipv4 unicast final ?
 Possible completions:
  <[Enter]>       Execute this command

  brief           Show IPv4 winning routes
  |               Pipe through a command

while <tab> is missing one :
 Xorp> show route table ipv4 unicast final  
 `final' is ambiguous.
 Possible completions:
  <[Enter]>       Execute this command  brief Show IPv4 winning routes
  |               Pipe through a command

It seems that the missing blank line exist 
on every node that are both executable and 
have sub-nodes.

Patrick, I checked the code regarding administrative
distance and protocol. I now see what you mean and I
agree that it's not a pretty solution. There should be
something like origin: ospf.0
where ospf.0 would be your first ospf process. Later
when we (cause we will :) ) support several routing 
processes it would just use a different number. 
Just my $0.02

Regards,
Kristian